Can you expound on this a bit more? I know you said before, an example of how the old verses versus new ones means that the older takes precedence, but, can you be a bit more specific [refer me to some sources] of where you're getting how most scholars in Islam interpret the Koran, etc?
Kind of makes the fact that Rushdie (who, unlike would-be Islamic reformers, has protection) is STILL being hunted down like a dog bitterly ironic...
Edit: Dammit, I can't get the link to include that last parantheses, just type in "naskh (tasfir)" at Wikipedia.
Newer takes precedence over the old, gotcha. And, they went a little (lot) fundamentalist (or as you refer: Orthodox Islam). Isn't a classic example of that the Taliban?
Stoning to death, by the strict Shariah law, was practically unheard of in Afganistan until the Taliban came into full power, after the takeover of Kabul in 1996.
(remember when we spoke of 'what changed, what made them radical' and you kept saying, they were *always* like that? While I said that was false?)
Wasn't one of their main mandate after the take-over to revolt against 'modernization', a disenchanment with 'modern life'?
Didn't they also take responsibility for the bombing of US embassies in 1998? And, we all know what happened in 2001.
The timeline seems awfully coincidental, and begs me to question again, 'what changed from before to after?' Unless you can point me to how it's always been the same, i.e., this radical.